ArmA 3 on Steamworks?

[gammadust 12]

(threads keep being merged into this one, don't they?)

In a way, i am glad to know this community shows to be much more Consumer Rights aware then others, those who refuse Steam do appear much more able to follow their principles than elsewere. It fits the profiling i had done through time. Though this raises a serious problem BI will have to face.

[NoQuarter 0]

...the devblog basically implies the option of taking time / letting Arma 3 slip into 2014 came up and that Maruk said "NO"...

...the devblog's words emphasizing 2013 may have been an euphemism for "2013 or simply cut our losses with Arma 3 and cancel it"...

That "2013 or bust" argument is getting old.

Exactly what were Mr. Spanel & crew going to move on to if ArmA if III was canceled?

Where has it been stated -for the record- that the CEO actually set that parameter.

Ask me, it was just another one of their preemptive excuses.

____

Instead of demanding that some of us take our tin-foil hats off, perhaps some of you should put your thinking caps on.

[kualus 1]

(threads keep being merged into this one, don't they?)

In a way, i am glad to know this community shows to be much more Consumer Rights aware then others, those who refuse Steam do appear much more able to follow their principles than elsewere. It fits the profiling i had done through time. Though this raises a serious problem BI will have to face.

Well said. Good to see someone has foresight.

[Hicks_09 10]

(threads keep being merged into this one, don't they?)

In a way, i am glad to know this community shows to be much more Consumer Rights aware then others, those who refuse Steam do appear much more able to follow their principles than elsewere. It fits the profiling i had done through time. Though this raises a serious problem BI will have to face.

There's a huge amount of apathy unfortunately within the games purchasing public however. As long as they get the shiny they tend to be happy. Unless as I mentioned before they are pushed too far. Look at Ubisoft for that example.

[JdB 151]

None? You buy the game at $50 price point. Then year later you re-sell it. It doesn't matter at which price. You lose it. Somebody else gets it. BIS still got its 50 bucks. To them you may as well still be using that copy. It's not a lost sale because there's only 1 copy, it just switched hands with one party always losing the game.

You buy the game from BIS at $50. A year later you sell it to the other guy at $15 = $15 discount for you, $25 of lost revenue for BIS.

You buy the game from BIS at $50. A year later the other guy buys it from BIS at $25 (price drop because it's an older title) = $75 for BIS.

The only person that wins in reselling games is the consumer (and if used a store/webshop that is the middleman).

[chrisb 196]

Well I have opened my Steam account, not putting anything in the library except of course A3. I don’t like downloading games prefer hard copy, so will probably buy the disc, not sure though.

Looked around a little, whilst pondering on how long I might be playing A3. Steam is a typical selling machine, lots of adverts and completely aimed at the mainstream. Of course most of us know that already, but maybe thats the future, how to survive in the industry.

Having run a business for a very long time, I know how hard it is in any industry. I don't necessarily believe the reason they gave, is why this has gone the way it has, not saying it isn't part of it, but most companies won't give the customer the full story, its usually financial.

Many of the players that play in the group I play, say they are stopping at A2, we'll see.

It’s a shame really, but a good business decision financially, I would imagine, can’t argue with that.

I will be buying it I think, well pretty sure :confused:

Just hope that the game is worth the drama its now caused..

[metalcraze 290]

You buy the game from BIS at $50. A year later you sell it to the other guy at $15 = $15 discount for you, $25 of lost revenue for BIS.

But I don't own the copy anymore. I can as well say I never even had it - and I just lost 15 bucks for nothing.

You buy the game from BIS at $50. A year later the other guy buys it from BIS at $25 (price drop because it's an older title) = $75 for BIS.

The only person that wins in reselling games is the consumer (and if used a store/webshop that is the middleman).

Same can be said about any used market. You resold GMC's car at a lower price? You've killed GMC!

You bought GTX460 3 years ago at 250 bucks but now you sell it at $150? Some Nvidia coworker won't be able to feed his poor family this month - how could you?

[iceman77 18]

It’s a shame really, but a good business decision financially, I would imagine, can’t argue with that.

Well said. This whole argument (thread) could end on that statement. It's still frustrating to someone with principles though. Someone who believes simplicity is the way. Cause in all honesty, steam isn't needed other than generating some extra revenue from the mainstream.. .

I still don't understand though, why it has to be mandatory. How, is forcing me to use steam, going to generate this extra revenue? The games already on steam for all who use steam, to see.

[dunedain 48]

None? You buy the game at $50 price point. Then year later you re-sell it. It doesn't matter at which price. You lose it. Somebody else gets it. BIS still got its 50 bucks. To them you may as well still be using that copy. It's not a lost sale because there's only 1 copy, it just switched hands with one party always losing the game.

As for "but real life stuff loses its value" - so do even digital games. A year ago TOH was 50 bucks. Now it's 33% cheaper anywhere. Games lose value no matter what happens. You won't be able to resell a used copy of a digital game at $50 either.

I like how you totally elude the fact the guy you sold your game to is, in the end, a lost client for BIS. You don't even consider the greater scheme of thousands people doing the same. Of course they'ld loose money as there would be a lot less copies around.

As for you second point, again fallacious argument. While it's true many products lose value over time, in the case of digital products your own copy's worth, regardless of its "age", will equal digital retailers' offer. You of course will sell it for less, but nonetheless the product remains the same. The comparison with cars cannot work, as your own car's worth will always remain way below the price it is sold brandnew because of how worn out this things get fast.

If you try and resell a car with a meager 10Km years after it was originaly bought (for all effects just as new), you will have a cut in value. This is a kind of value loss which also affect digital products.

Indeed. But what doesn't affect digital products is alterability.

Edited February 23, 2013 by dunedain

[nettrucker 142]

from a business and profit oriented point of view . . . losing old customers over the gain of a bigger customer base by assigning exclusive rights is irrelevant. BIS had a major sales success with ArmA on Steam mostly generated by DAYZ IMHO. They see a chance to score big time so they won't miss their chance . . . even if they will lose some old time customers. They've made their decision let's move on. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO NOT PLAY ARMA 3 in case we dislike Steamworks, Steam and Valve in general.

Thank you :rolleyes:

[kualus 1]

They've made their decision let's move on. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO NOT PLAY ARMA 3 in case we dislike Steamworks, Steam and Valve in general.

Thank you :rolleyes:

Thanks for reminding us of what I said earlier.:)

[gammadust 12]

(...)

I still don't understand though, why it has to be mandatory. How, is forcing me to use steam, going to generate this extra revenue? The games already on steam for all who use steam, to see.

"(... ) This drained so many of our resources, that we could not support the game itself as much as we'd have liked. (...) we can take those resources and put them to much better use: making the most splendid game possible."

"External solutions have their own issues, such as the lack of immediate control, but Steamworks saves us needed time"

BI is basicaly claiming Steamworks saves them dev time. The problem, afaik, is Steamworks access and usage can't be enabled outside of a running Steam client. That is why it becomes mandatory. (While being different from current Arma2-Steam non-dependency)

Edited February 23, 2013 by gammadust

[chortles 263]

When they went Steamworks they could've disabled the multiplayer entirely like BIS is planning to do (according to the article) - but they only disable the "online" multiplayer. As in - when you try logging into their server (which tracks stats, allows your teams to gain exp and develop players etc) in offline mode it says "Steam must go online bla bla" and kicks you out.

However there is still LAN and direct IP multiplayer available. You won't have all the aforementioned features from the full online play (e.g. your team will remain static without any exp gain) - but it's a very nice back up. And it can be useful - once their servers went down for 5 days straight due to some large moving. Could've been very annoying yet multiplayer was still an option. But they could've simply disabled even accessing MP menu using steamworks DRM to begin with or not give those options at all.

This signals that Steam itself isn't too restricting of how you can play MP... so now enough of worrying about Steam-as-DRM, demand LAN/direct IP support for offline mode! Dwarden acknowledged the concern on this front (and frankly it's not BI's fault if offline mode support is unreliable) so push 'im to not forget you guys! :-P

[W0lle 1050]

If most of your favorite arma friends and/or communities are all playing arma 3 it's hard to keep refusing steam though.

Wanna bet?

[chortles 263]

from a business and profit oriented point of view . . . losing old customers over the gain of a bigger customer base by assigning exclusive rights is irrelevant. BIS had a major sales success with ArmA on Steam mostly generated by DAYZ IMHO. They see a chance to score big time so they won't miss their chance . . . even if they will lose some old time customers. They've made their decision let's move on. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO NOT PLAY ARMA 3 in case we dislike Steamworks, Steam and Valve in general.

Thank you :rolleyes:

Out of those who say that they're boycotting Arma 3, you're the one I most respect in your response because you get it.

[gammadust 12]

Yes, i suspect, that keeping a Multiplayer (Steamworks tied+DRM) executable apart from a Singleplayer (Steam DRM free + maybe while FADEing in) would go along way in relieveing many of us.

[kualus 1]

Wanna bet?

Indeed. It's especially easy for those who aren't tied down by commitments to squads. Real friends will understand your reasons for not playing a certain game with them.

[zoog 18]

Wanna bet?

That's why I said, in the post it is referring to, that 10% will probably not do it because of refusing to use steam for whatever game anyway.

[Hicks_09 10]

from a business and profit oriented point of view . . . losing old customers over the gain of a bigger customer base by assigning exclusive rights is irrelevant. BIS had a major sales success with ArmA on Steam mostly generated by DAYZ IMHO. They see a chance to score big time so they won't miss their chance . . . even if they will lose some old time customers. They've made their decision let's move on. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO NOT PLAY ARMA 3 in case we dislike Steamworks, Steam and Valve in general.

Thank you :rolleyes:

You do realise that you can sell a title through steam without tying it to steamworks?

[nettrucker 142]

You do realise that you can sell a title through steam without tying it to steamworks?

Yes I'm fully aware about it.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

I don't know why there's so many posts blaming dayz while preaching 'they want cod kiddies' etc when uhh, you know, there's stand-alone dayz. Why would the 'cod kiddies' buy arma 3? they want dayz, not arma. they have zero interest in arma.

If this was the case steam works would only be for standalone dayz but it's for both, why would they do that? maybe the original blog has an explanation as to why.

Because steamworks is incredibly easy to implement and it's powerful, yes for the end user it only means stuff like achievements but there's a lot more to it for the developer. And as said in the blog, only having to focus on a single platform or DRM means more time spent working on the actual game and less time spent making sure the game works with every DRM that other retailers online and brick and mortar. There's a lot of legit complaints here but the conspiracy theory stuff is ridiculous and boycotting a game isn't going to solve anything regarding consumer rights. And as I previously posted, if you want a refund on steam, quote your damn countries relevant law!! they will refund you! The other less-legit complaint is that it's redundant. Okay, it's an extra program you have to run, so it is redundant if you don't plan on using it but are you seriously going to turn your back on a developer just because of that? It's not like they're forcing you to carry a ton of bricks up a mountain just to start the game. It's just a program, a convenient program that's usually considered one of the advantages of pc gaming (sales, ease of use, vast library of new and old games etc)

Back when steam was a one trick pony (a platform for valve games) I didn't have any kind words for it either but now it's a marketplace and it's probably the best place to buy games as I can usually get them cheaper and faster than anywhere else. I don't think I'm going to convince many (if anyone) to at least give it a try as there seems to be quite a few in this thread who are utterly convinced that steam is the literal embodiment of evil but I hope at least some can come to their senses regarding this barely even mild-inconvenience

[Neopas 10]

Steam exclusive.So sad really. ARMA is the only game(+dlc`s) that I was buying at release day prices. No point in preferring Sprocket anymore also,it will deliver steam keys also. Steam Spring Sale it is then..

It`s not all black or white of course but for any business the less middle men the better in the long run both for producers and consumers. Hopefully the mentality that allowed this first step to be taken considering distribution won`t later affect design.

[chortles 263]

Steam exclusive.So sad really. ARMA is the only game(+dlc`s) that I was buying at release day prices. No point in preferring Sprocket anymore also,it will deliver steam keys also. Steam Spring Sale it is then..

It`s not all black or white of course but for any business the less middle men the better in the long run both for producers and consumers. Hopefully the mentality that allowed this first step to be taken considering distribution won`t later affect design.

It already did, dude, have you not read what antoineflemming, -Coulum- and a bunch more have been say?

[rehtus777 10]

Look at it this way: If Steam ends up being a pain in the buns, then come ArmA 4, lesson learned. But, if Steam improves the game, then it's here to stay. This isn't rocket science.

[Alwarren 2767]

How nice of Gabe to allow me to do something I'm legally supposed to be allowed to do (in Europe anyway)

Don't shoot the messenger.